Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Section 149(3) of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 requires a prior hearing to the accused before sanction for prosecution can be granted for offences for which the Registrar is the sanctioning authority.
Analysis: The provision distinguishes between prosecutions requiring sanction of the State Government and those requiring sanction of the Registrar. The hearing requirement in the latter part of the sub-section is linked to the sanction spoken of in the first part, which concerns sanction by the State Government for offences under Section 147(1)(c). A construction extending the hearing requirement to sanctions to be granted by the Registrar would require reading words into the statute, which is impermissible when the language is plain. Such an interpretation would also create an unworkable scheme, because the hearing would be conducted by one authority while the sanction decision would lie with another.
Conclusion: The prior-hearing requirement does not apply to sanction for prosecution where the Registrar is the sanctioning authority, and the High Court's contrary direction was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: A court cannot add words to a clear statutory provision, and the hearing requirement under Section 149(3) applies only to the category of sanction expressly contemplated by that language.